Re: Real issues around virginity

[inbloomer]

To clarify a couple of points here:

I'm not making a "women must like jerks" argument. What I'm getting at is that people like to come up with an easy reason why some people finding dating easy and others never have any success, because that's more comfortable for them than just saying it's luck. But anything they come up with, not just the obvious ones like looks and money, doesn't really add up. You say confidence is the key? I've known plenty of people who were painfully shy and/or had major self-esteem problems yet were fine with dating. You say it's about being fun and exciting? I've known plenty who were drop-dead boring, or had serious health issues that restricted what activities they could do, who again attracted partners.

The one and only factor I've found that does seem to have a statistically significant correlation is that people who wear their hearts on their sleeves - if they're feeling an emotion, you can easily sense it - appear to do better than people who are naturally more guarded and find it difficult to let their authentic emotions out. My guess is that heart-on-sleeve people aren't necessarily any more likeable, but they resolve attractions more quickly and so are more likely to get to someone with whom it's mutual.

I totally get other people's right not to be interested - and to be fair most women who turned me down probably went on to find people with whom they were more compatible. What is specifically irritating is "yes means no" behaviour, where words and body language are saying one thing but actions are saying another, e.g. "Hey it was awesome to meet you, yes I'd love to meet up for a proper drink! Why don't we do [date that's 6 weeks away]?" I've had a lot of this over the years, and it's really got worse as I've got more socially calibrated, because they're less likely to say a flat no.

From what I can gather, I think that literally is back-burnering - she wants to keep me as a possibility but not push forward with it. That's frustrating because it suggests I am pretty close - I'm not "undateable" - I'm just not finding anyone who wants it quite enough to put skin in the game herself.

The examples you give sound like things where you were entirely right to say no - however desperate one might feel, I don't think a beggars can't be choosers attitude is ever healthy.

[Datelessman]

To clarify a couple of points here:

I'm not making a "women must like jerks" argument. What I'm getting at is that people like to come up with an easy reason why some people finding dating easy and others never have any success, because that's more comfortable for them than just saying it's luck. But anything they come up with, not just the obvious ones like looks and money, doesn't really add up. You say confidence is the key? I've known plenty of people who were painfully shy and/or had major self-esteem problems yet were fine with dating. You say it's about being fun and exciting? I've known plenty who were drop-dead boring, or had serious health issues that restricted what activities they could do, who again attracted partners.

The one and only factor I've found that does seem to have a statistically significant correlation is that people who wear their hearts on their sleeves - if they're feeling an emotion, you can easily sense it - appear to do better than people who are naturally more guarded and find it difficult to let their authentic emotions out. My guess is that heart-on-sleeve people aren't necessarily any more likeable, but they resolve attractions more quickly and so are more likely to get to someone with whom it's mutual.

Thank you for the clarification. You do bring up a fair point that as much as DNL claims that you don't have to be "the most interesting man in the world" to date, a lot of his advice (and the advice of others) seems to stem from at least ATTEMPTING to be that to a great degree. And that can be well and good until one realizes, as you have, that there are plenty of boring, shy, or awkward dudes who manage to have active dating lives...or at least more active than older virgins tend to. I do think it isn't always good to focus too much on the "men who are lamer than me get dates, why not I" or similar thoughts for long, because that is always how it tends to be. And lord knows women experience a version of this, too.

Of course, as you suggest, if people just shrugged their shoulders and said it was all luck and circumstance, dating coaches would be out of business and many people's feelings would not be aided. I can imagine how it can feel daunting to invest a lot of time, energy, and money into a wardrobe change, professional online dating pics, maybe a new hairstyle and adding some hobbies and classes to the schedule only to turn around to see Captain Hair-gell and Spreadsheet land the ladies even though he can't talk about anything other than "dividends" and "long term gains," or even watch the office watercooler zombie stagger through relationships. I just don't know how good it is to focus too much on that.

For me the one factor which seemed to be universally successful is confidence -- or its imitator, arrogance. At least one of my good friends flat out told me would fake being confident until it became natural back in high school. And to a man, all of my friends at least got some smidge of a confidence boost once they had some romantic successes, at least when dealing with women. "Knowing I can satisfy a woman makes it easy to talk to them after," another one of my pals once told me around college age. Again, these are just anecdotes, but I think they add up more than some sources claim.

I totally get other people's right not to be interested - and to be fair most women who turned me down probably went on to find people with whom they were more compatible. What is specifically irritating is "yes means no" behaviour, where words and body language are saying one thing but actions are saying another, e.g. "Hey it was awesome to meet you, yes I'd love to meet up for a proper drink! Why don't we do [date that's 6 weeks away]?" I've had a lot of this over the years, and it's really got worse as I've got more socially calibrated, because they're less likely to say a flat no.

From what I can gather, I think that literally is back-burnering - she wants to keep me as a possibility but not push forward with it. That's frustrating because it suggests I am pretty close - I'm not "undateable" - I'm just not finding anyone who wants it quite enough to put skin in the game herself.

Frankly, many women are not going "to say a flat no" for two reasons. One is some may feel it is too harsh and don't know how to reject someone outright without being too harsh. The other is about safety, because many men do not take blunt firm rejections well; some at best see it as an invitation to try harder and at worst they see it as an excuse to stalk/assault/kill someone. The majority of women who are hurt or killed are victims of men who they knew in their lives, even if briefly.

I have some sympathy for this because I can easily imagine it being very hard for me to risk "breaking someone's heart" if they were into me and I wasn't into them. I would feel awful. I wouldn't know how to do it. One of the genuine advantages, in my eyes, of being me is that I never had to go thru it. I never had to tell a woman looking at me with those big doe eyes, "I'm just not into you." And I am glad for that. And that's coming from a position where I can take for granted that I am very likely not going to to be stalked/raped/killed/trolled by someone I reject.

I won't deny that some women perhaps do "back burner" people, but men do that a lot in their dating lives, too. A guy's "little black book" or host of numbers in his wallet of single women who he could call when lonely has been a social cliche for as long as "THE THREE STOOGES," if not longer. So if women do do this, it's fair game in my eyes. It can suck when it happens to you or I, but it is one of those things which is not going away barring a massive change to society or social rules.

One thing that does seem universal is that if a woman is genuinely interested in a person, she won't dawdle about it and will make attempts at more dates clear. Schedules will be tossed aside.

The examples you give sound like things where you were entirely right to say no - however desperate one might feel, I don't think a beggars can't be choosers attitude is ever healthy.

It isn't, but I won't deny there are times I would just really like to get it over with and not be the Dateless-Man anymore. So I was a guy whose first sexual experience was gross or regrettable? Congratulations, I've hit the average of the bell curve. But I would like to avoid that whenever possible. Other people have also confirmed to me it was the right choice, at least in terms of my mother's creepy friend.

On the other hand, at least in theory, one of the opportunities of being an older male virgin (or any older virgin) is the hormonal powder keg of high school and college is over, so some of those regrettable choices become more unlikely. Less likely to lose it in booze hazed house parties in 30 seconds, for instance. My opportunity to have many lovers may be over. But perhaps quantity trumps quality. Nearly everyone I know would gladly delete one lover from their histories if they could.

That said, I know my first experience is not the be-all to end all. It's just the end of the beginning. The problem is, it's been a very long beginning. And outside of those who might fetishize my virginity, I have yet to prove to be funny, kind, cool, or smart enough that I met a woman who wanted to take it to a level beyond friendship. There is a definite shift from "this guy is funny to talk to" and "I want to touch his lips to mine," an invisible barrier, which feels like the Great Wall of China to those on the outside. And I have no idea what I have to do to get over that wall, or even if anything I offer is capable. But I certainly have other concerns now, and age at least will make a lot of these theoretical questions moot soon enough.

[Hielario]

The only matter here that I feel like I'm able to comment without spouting vitriol is your opportunity with your mother's friend. Could you please elaborate on how she creeps you out?

[inbloomer]

What I'm talking about here isn't the same as a soft no. I agree that women won't usually give direct nos, for the reasons you state - in fact they're only likely to get direct if you've actually made them angry. In my experience a soft no tends to take the form of finding excuses - like, if the suggested "date" was playing a sport together, her critical piece of kit will happen to be broken and of course she couldn't possibly borrow one.

What I mean here is where she's doing things that she really wouldn't be doing if she was just trying to get rid of me, and indeed are going beyond distant friendly acquaintanceship (proactively suggesting platonic dates, liking all my new photos on social media, meeting me in private spaces like my flat), yet there's never enough follow-through to give me a chance at building real momentum. In effect, she's flaky and unreliable or procrastinates, so by the time I see her again it feels like the connection is back to square one.

Obviously it's hard to be sure what the women involved are thinking. But the effect is that I always feel like I'm the reserve, the insurance option for when she's got nothing else on. I don't think this is a gender thing: I've read pieces by women who feel they've always been treated that way by men. But it makes you wonder what you actually have to do to be other people's first choice, the one they will rip up their schedules for.

[Datelessman]

The only matter here that I feel like I'm able to comment without spouting vitriol is your opportunity with your mother's friend. Could you please elaborate on how she creeps you out?

My mother's friend creeps me out because every time she has interacted with me ever since college she has made blunt, awkward, and out of context passes at me regardless of the circumstance without it being initiated or wanted on my end. Once she was with my mother and I at a nursing home where my grandmother was recovering from surgery for a holiday and she was making passes at me there. She's attempted to give me costume jewelry uninitiated and said it was "her wedding ring" or some such. I first met her when I visited my mother's job when I was very small and a part of me wonders if she's waited all this time like a lady version of Dorian Grey. She is not my type physically and aside for the unwarranted flirting, we don't get along in terms of personalities. If she calls the apartment and I am just on the phone to ask who it is and to see if my mother is available or willing to talk to her, she'll use that opportunity to lob a crude pass at me.

She's my mother's friend, not mine. I've rarely talked to her beyond for functionary things like having to be at the same dinner or something. But that doesn't faze her.

If she was my type physically, or even if we got along in terms of personality and our conversations weren't some combination of one sided pass throwing mixed with not connecting or really agreeing about anything, I might have taken her up on her "all but stated bluntly" offer by now just out of sheer desperation. But she is neither. It isn't the age thing alone; sure it would feel a little strange to sleep with a woman who is as old as my mother or older, but if I got along with a woman in some way that would just be a number. But we don't and the longer I think about how long this has gone on, the more grossed out I get. It's not like a harassment thing or anything, it's like, "I barely talk to her more than once every year or three and even there she throws a line at me which would be blunt for a porn film."

But, I see it as a useful lesson. A lot of guys seem to think women "have it easier" because they get "offers from everywhere" and "could sleep with any guy they wanted if they wanted." Not only is that not true, but it can actually be gross, inconvenient or, in the case of a woman, scary and dangerous, to be hit on by someone you don't like or in an unwarranted way. Not many guys have this experience. I do. So it helps keep me in check, or at least helps me with perspective or trying to relate to someone. Because I do try to relate to people.

I know that when I am in my 60's I wouldn't be throwing blunt and unwanted passes at the daughter of a friend who's half my age no matter how "beautiful" she may be, because that is sleazy and disrespectful. Hell, I did a speed dating event in 2015 that (contrary to my belief) featured a lot of women who were barely a day over 21 and I felt like Count Dracula around women that much younger than me. These days at my age someone aged 26-27 is about as young as I could go without it being too creepy, but honestly anyone under 30 seems kind of green to me.

What I'm talking about here isn't the same as a soft no. I agree that women won't usually give direct nos, for the reasons you state - in fact they're only likely to get direct if you've actually made them angry. In my experience a soft no tends to take the form of finding excuses - like, if the suggested "date" was playing a sport together, her critical piece of kit will happen to be broken and of course she couldn't possibly borrow one.

What I mean here is where she's doing things that she really wouldn't be doing if she was just trying to get rid of me, and indeed are going beyond distant friendly acquaintanceship (proactively suggesting platonic dates, liking all my new photos on social media, meeting me in private spaces like my flat), yet there's never enough follow-through to give me a chance at building real momentum. In effect, she's flaky and unreliable or procrastinates, so by the time I see her again it feels like the connection is back to square one.

Obviously it's hard to be sure what the women involved are thinking. But the effect is that I always feel like I'm the reserve, the insurance option for when she's got nothing else on. I don't think this is a gender thing: I've read pieces by women who feel they've always been treated that way by men. But it makes you wonder what you actually have to do to be other people's first choice, the one they will rip up their schedules for.

Maybe she enjoys your company, but only as a platonic friend and not as a lover. It sounds like she is game to hang out with you up to the point where she would cross that "invisible line" between pal and potential lover and she never crosses it. Or it could be possible that, as a human, she's just as awkward and oblivious about signals like we are, and may not realize how much of a tease she seems to be to you.

I am not trying to deny your experience; she may totally be keeping you on a side list and only hangs out with you when she's not busy with "higher priority men" and wants you on a shelf until and unless she feels truly desperate. That is totally possible. Callous and selfish people know no one gender or orientation. But it may also be that she does genuinely like you as a friend, and nothing more.

Regardless, the question is whether this is enough for you, and what you are going to do about it. Because you could either continue to hover around on terms which are not satisfying to you in the hopes she will eventually reconsider, or you could enforce a boundary. Does she know you like her that way? There is no shame in admitting if you can't be a friend to someone you want to sleep with if she has no intention to sleep with you, so long as you're honest about that. At times it wasn't easy for me to hang around women who I had unrequited crushed on myself; on occasion in high school and college it even brought me to tears in rare, private moments (which at the time, ashamed me, because I interpreted that as weakness).

I mean I totally get it. As someone who is kind of starved for positive attention from women, I utterly adore when I am the friend or acquaintance of one. It makes me feel like less of a freak. I have known many women who laughed at all my jokes, genuinely engaged me for advice, valued my company, had passionate dialogues with me where we had tons in common, but would never think of me as anything more than an asexual cartoon character who they would never imagine in romantic terms (not far removed from how Teela usually saw Orko, for a geeky example). And I understand not wanting to give that up or risk it, even if it can ultimately be unsatisfying. But if you hate it, then all it is doing is wasting your time when in theory you could be spending time trying to find someone who is into you that way.

As for what you have to do or be to attain that level of schedule-tearing attraction in a woman, I have no clue. The cheap, easy answer is "it depends on the woman." Which is why, in theory, the angle is to cast a wide net and try to encounter women with similar interests. And not to waste time on dead leads.

Maybe if you can be clear on terms without being harsh or even dampening your friendship, she might refer you to a pal? I hear some people try to set up people they know, and having a woman who can positively vouch for you is gold. Widening your social circle isn't a bad thing in general. Or at least that is what people tell me. No one I knew ever set me up with anyone. Which I interpreted as either I stink or they didn't want to feel responsibility for potential heartbreak or awkwardness for two friends.

[Hielario]

So, you're creeped out by the mere incongruity of her behaviour? Interesting. I didn't expect that. For me to have that sort of reaction to someone, I have to feel like i'm in outright danger when they're near (which isn't uncommon in my existence, sadly...). Personally I'm also oddly impressed by the fact that someone as old, frustrated and desperate as you still has that sort of reactions, but I guess there's a bit of everything in the Lord's vineyard.

[Hielario]

Also, I may be talking out of my ass, but even with the creepiness, have you considered that you'd be better off screwing her than with a sex worker? You could actually trust her word about your performance, since her interest/enjoyment isn't faked for the sake of pleasing a client . And it's probably more safe, since you're not engaging on a practice that tends to be connected to crime (both because of the rampant exploitation in the sector and because it's a great opportunity for killing/stealing from/scamming/blackmailing naïve men like us). Better uncomfortable than risky, don't you think?

(Sorry for double posting. I thought this forum had an edit button?)

[Enail]

<mod>Hielario, Datelessman has clearly expressed that he is uncomfortable with the sexual attention of the woman in question; it's not appropriate to dismiss it or talk like it's an unreasonable response compared to how you think you would respond, and it's especially inappropriate to try and talk anyone into having sex with someone who creeps them out and makes them uncomfortable. You're also being rather rude to him. This seems to be part of a general tendency in your forum posts.

I'd like you to rethink how you approach interactions on this forum in general and give a read to the Forum Guidelines, especially The Basics #7, Attacks and Other Unacceptable Topics #5, and Venting, Advice and Discussion #5 and 6. And generally give more thought whenever you post in response to other people whether what you're saying is respectful of their experiences, emotions and challenges, and whether both phrasing and content are polite and considerate of the OP and other people in the thread.

You've had issues before with being dismissive of other people's experiences with unwanted sexual attention, and that is a topic we take seriously, so any further comments along those lines will result in short or long-term bans. <mod>

[Datelessman]

Thanks, Enail. If it's okay I don't mind replying this time. If not I can delete this upon request.

So, you're creeped out by the mere incongruity of her behaviour? Interesting. I didn't expect that. For me to have that sort of reaction to someone, I have to feel like i'm in outright danger when they're near (which isn't uncommon in my existence, sadly...). Personally I'm also oddly impressed by the fact that someone as old, frustrated and desperate as you still has that sort of reactions, but I guess there's a bit of everything in the Lord's vineyard.

It is possible to be creeped out by a person, place, or thing without having to be or perceive yourself to be "in outright danger." In fact many reactions, such as disgust, are not even human emotions or reactions; animals have them too.

Also, I may be talking out of my ass, but even with the creepiness, have you considered that you'd be better off screwing her than with a sex worker? You could actually trust her word about your performance, since her interest/enjoyment isn't faked for the sake of pleasing a client . And it's probably more safe, since you're not engaging on a practice that tends to be connected to crime (both because of the rampant exploitation in the sector and because it's a great opportunity for killing/stealing from/scamming/blackmailing naïve men like us). Better uncomfortable than risky, don't you think?

(Sorry for double posting. I thought this forum had an edit button?)

The edit button is at the top of your post when you log in and look at it, towards the upper right.

For the sake of disclosure I did consider it despite all of my misgivings and being creeped out, as I stated above. But ultimately I decided that as desperate as I may be, there were lines I was unwilling to cross in order to lose my virginity and this was one of them. Despite having access to a willing participant, I would not capitalize if I had neither physical nor personal interest, and I got any kind of "bad feelings" about it, whether disgust, creepiness, fear, etc. There are other lines, of course, but those are more blunt and obvious (i.e. I am not going to ply people with alcohol, manipulate "barely legal" or drastically younger women, outright become a predator, etc.). And usually most people I tell this story too tend to agree that I made the right call, albeit sometimes for different reasons.

The big difference, were I to utilize a sex worker, is that if I were to use that option I would at least have the option of selecting someone I was at least physically attracted to. Plus, the situation would be appropriate for flirty type of dialogue. And a sex worker is still a person; money aside, it's possible to have a genuine rapport with someone even in a "customer service" basis for a brief period of time. But again, that is also unlikely for me; my stance has just softened on it overall from back when I was on DNL's forum.

There is a lot of exploitation in the sex worker industry, and if I ever did decide to capitalize I would likely travel to somewhere it was legal in order to mitigate that. But most of the risk is on the women performing the services. Yes, some "johns" do get robbed or blackmailed, but it's on the low end of the spectrum. Word of mouth can ruin a sex worker's career, and less money is bad for her. Remember, "man bites dog" is news, even if "dog bites man" is more common.

[Enail]

It's fine for you to respond, Datelessman, and thanks for pointing where the edit button is, I meant to but forgot

[Datelessman]

It's fine for you to respond, Datelessman, and thanks for pointing where the edit button is, I meant to but forgot

You're welcome. I have a call center customer service job so guiding people around with website stuff is what I do.

[Hielario]

Siiigh. I'm sorry again. I was just surprised but no matter what I write, it comes out sounding wrong or I insult people...

(Call center, though? I hope you get GLOWING reviews, because you certainly are amazing at explaining things. Ah, if I were a woman...!)

[Datelessman]

Siiigh. I'm sorry again. I was just surprised but no matter what I write, it comes out sounding wrong or I insult people...

(Call center, though? I hope you get GLOWING reviews, because you certainly are amazing at explaining things. Ah, if I were a woman...!)

It's okay, I didn't take it personally.

I actually have been averaging 1-2 compliments a month from "customers" at the job which I have been working for over the past year. I started working on the telephones in a sales/customer service capacity since summer 2011 and never really stopped. It was the first work I could get after I lost my social work jobs in late 2008 and was unemployed for over 2 years during the "Great Recession." It wasn't the work I imagined doing after college, but I've been doing this longer than I went to school.

I attribute it to what I call my "cop voice." I sound like a generic white cop on the phone, which usually helps people take what I say in a more serious manner. It also allows me to deadpan some puns now and then. I mastered the technique of when someone says something dumb, I merely repeat it back to them word-for-word so they have a chance to catch themselves and adjust.
Listen to what my voice sounds like here, if you want. I was DNL's first caller. My claim to internet fame!

In the small sample of romantic themes events I have done since (one speed dating session, watching an associate of mine bomb with an impromptu "subway cold approach", and one or two friends' parties), I can see how doing it for so many years actually has helped me. Since I can "sense" someone's tone or interest on the phone, it is easier for me to do so live. I know how to carry a conversation better even if I am nervous, angry, or even disinterested. I can sense the loss of interest, which is important to not waste someone's time. Unfortunately, it's also given me a bad habit of cutting people off, which was a technique for sales, that I am still trying to unlearn. At least one co-worker years ago said I came off as "condescending;" but then again, he was a snarky practical joker. I learned I can easily entertain a small group of people and make them putty with my jokes, but I still find bars and clubs loud and overwhelming. I certainly have cultivated a demeanor of being more confident than I am; I've said I can sound like I know what I am talking about, even if I am utterly confused. Flirting and expressing romantic interest, though, still feels like unexplored territory with fewer rules and too many variables. There are set rules of engagement at call centers.

It's for this reason, among many, that I have adopted a stance of keeping my virginity close to my vest unless I REALLY sense some above average understanding vibes from a woman, which contracts to some of what I used to spout on DNL years ago.

[inbloomer]

Maybe she enjoys your company, but only as a platonic friend and not as a lover. It sounds like she is game to hang out with you up to the point where she would cross that "invisible line" between pal and potential lover and she never crosses it. Or it could be possible that, as a human, she's just as awkward and oblivious about signals like we are, and may not realize how much of a tease she seems to be to you.

I am not trying to deny your experience; she may totally be keeping you on a side list and only hangs out with you when she's not busy with "higher priority men" and wants you on a shelf until and unless she feels truly desperate. That is totally possible. Callous and selfish people know no one gender or orientation. But it may also be that she does genuinely like you as a friend, and nothing more.

Regardless, the question is whether this is enough for you, and what you are going to do about it. Because you could either continue to hover around on terms which are not satisfying to you in the hopes she will eventually reconsider, or you could enforce a boundary. Does she know you like her that way? There is no shame in admitting if you can't be a friend to someone you want to sleep with if she has no intention to sleep with you, so long as you're honest about that. At times it wasn't easy for me to hang around women who I had unrequited crushed on myself; on occasion in high school and college it even brought me to tears in rare, private moments (which at the time, ashamed me, because I interpreted that as weakness).

I mean I totally get it. As someone who is kind of starved for positive attention from women, I utterly adore when I am the friend or acquaintance of one. It makes me feel like less of a freak. I have known many women who laughed at all my jokes, genuinely engaged me for advice, valued my company, had passionate dialogues with me where we had tons in common, but would never think of me as anything more than an asexual cartoon character who they would never imagine in romantic terms (not far removed from how Teela usually saw Orko, for a geeky example). And I understand not wanting to give that up or risk it, even if it can ultimately be unsatisfying. But if you hate it, then all it is doing is wasting your time when in theory you could be spending time trying to find someone who is into you that way.

As for what you have to do or be to attain that level of schedule-tearing attraction in a woman, I have no clue. The cheap, easy answer is "it depends on the woman." Which is why, in theory, the angle is to cast a wide net and try to encounter women with similar interests. And not to waste time on dead leads.

Maybe if you can be clear on terms without being harsh or even dampening your friendship, she might refer you to a pal? I hear some people try to set up people they know, and having a woman who can positively vouch for you is gold. Widening your social circle isn't a bad thing in general. Or at least that is what people tell me. No one I knew ever set me up with anyone. Which I interpreted as either I stink or they didn't want to feel responsibility for potential heartbreak or awkwardness for two friends.

Here's the thing. People like DNL have really pushed this line about the Friend Zone doesn't exist, you should feel grateful that this awesome woman wants to be your friend. In practice though, what's actually on offer is a friendship with a power imbalance. You feel you have to say yes to every invitation and drop everything and come running when asked, because you're the one who's lonely and trying to get out and do things with other people. But from her point of view you're her emergency plus one, if and when needed. That's not saying women are out to scam you, it's more that people have complicated lives and limited resources, and if you're not her top priority she may not be able to deliver the quality of friendship that you want and she might ideally want.

I do think it's a serious question though whether that's a good deal. It seems preferable to have someone to do things with than stay home alone, and yes there's a chance she could set you up with someone else, but does this imbalance ultimately breed resentment and lower self esteem? It's certainly the case that the boundaries can get a bit weird: the last woman I was in a "Schrodinger relationship" with got oddly snippy and jealous when I mentioned in the mildest way being attracted to anyone else, even though she definitely wasn't offering herself.

[Enail]

Inbloomer, what makes you think these women are interested in a romantic relationship, even a back-burner one? From what you say here, it sounds like these women are fairly consistantly acting like they want to be low-key/low-frequency casual friends with you, without wanting to have a romantic relationship or indicating that they would like to do so.  And then you're simultaneously relying on them for an excessive amount of your social needs for someone who hasn't shown they want that level of friendship with you, and expecting some kind of romantic reciprocation that it doesn't sound like you've made clear to them is what you're looking for. And then resenting them for it instead of telling them what you want or dialing back your own investment to a level that you'd be happy to put in given the level of closeness and romanticness they've shown you they want with you.

"Schrodinger's relationship" is basically no relationship until you de-Schordinger it by clearly indicating that you'd like a romantic relationship with them and them agreeing. Otherwise it's just wishful thinking or untested assumptions. You can't create a relationship by being as careful as possible to never clarify what either of you actually wants and then quietly putting in the effort or feelings that you want to be returned. If someone wants to date you, or be an irregular booty call, or become closer friends, asking out loud if they would like to do that with you won't destroy that desire.  

It sounds like the solution to this is be clearer in your own head about whether you're genuinely okay with platonic friendship with these people, be clearer with them about what you'd like from them, match your investment to theirs or disconnect if you're not okay with that level of relationship, and focus on cultivating more/closer friends to fill your social needs. It's not fair to a friend to put all your loneliness on them or to do things for them that you'll resent, that's not a considerate, honest or kind way to treat even a very casual friend. And doubly so if you resent them for having other people in their lives that they prioritize over you, or for not being interested in you romantically.

[inbloomer]

Regarding the woman I mentioned in the previous post: I never felt sexually or romantically attracted to her. She never gave any direct sign of being sexually or romantically attracted to me. Nonetheless, I’ve checked through the messages we sent each other (which I’d never done before), and they prove beyond all doubt that for an extended period this was a friendship that was well beyond low-key, low-frequency; there was mutual consent all the way; and in terms of who initiated what it was pretty spot on 50/50.

At one point we did three whole-day or half-day platonic dates within ten days. Outside that period, she came to my flat, she came to my parents’ house, I came to her flatmate’s birthday party, we did clubbing, theatre, cinema, museums, meals, drives, walks together, she liked and commented on all my social media posts and so on.

She had a boyfriend in another city, not from when we first met but soon after. At first she didn’t know whether things with the boyfriend were going to fizzle out quickly or not (she basically said so), and that was when our friendship was most intense. When it became clearer that that was serious and long-term, the situation started to feel a bit more awkward. In the end she chose to move city to be with him, and our friendship ended not acrimoniously but quite abruptly.

I feel sad that it ended, given that she was at least someone to do things with – even though after that magical ten days it never quite reached the same heights. A bit conflicted that I put a fair amount of myself into something that wasn’t ultimately going anywhere. She encouraged me to open up emotionally and do things that were stretching my boundaries, and it’s a fair question whether I would have been better to invest that energy somewhere else. Also a bit confused about certain aspects of what happened – she did show those odd signs of jealousy, even though there was no reason for her to.

Could we ever have hooked up, not on a serious basis but just as one more thing to have tried doing together? Definitely not on the timing as it happened. I’m dubious if at all, because my impression is that she had traditional views and wanted the feeling of Romance with a capital R. But if we had, the whole narrative around this would be different. A small amount of physical contact and it would be the story of a limited but actually pretty successful relationship, and I suspect I’d be getting lots of sympathy and encouragement. Instead it’s the Nice Guy stereotypes and the boilerplate lecture on entitlement. I suggest you have another think about the assumptions you’re making about me.

[Enail]

I didn't say anything about entitlement, I was just confused why you're bringing in it into a talk about romantic relationships if you didn't feel it was romantic, and since you were talking about feeling like you had to say yes to everything because you were lonely but she had other people to spend time with, it seemed like you were placing an unreasonable level of expectation on her to be your social life - neediness, rather than entitlement. The combination of the social expectation and mixing of romantic/platonic does sound give me some Nice Guy-ish vibes that concerned me in this context, though that's not specifically what I was trying to say. I'm sorry for misunderstanding the closeness of the friendship, though, it sounds like you had a very intense, genuine friendship for that period, and it's totally understandable to be upset about losing it.

I agree it particularly sucks when a friend disengages when they start dating someone, and that's a reasonable thing to be upset about. It also sucks when a friendship is briefly intense and very close but lands up dying out after that, but that's kind of just a normal thing that happens in some friendships - I've found that friendships that start out extremely intensely very quickly often do either quickly fade out or end explosively - and if someone feels less enthusiastic after a short initial burst of friendship I'm not sure what else they could do that would be considerate and within social norms other than trying to dial back the intensity and see if the other person's okay with that kind of friendship. Similarly, it's not great that she let things die that abruptly after moving away, but again, in a short, intense friendship like that, I'm not sure it's realistic to expect that it can keep going in the same way a longer-term, more established friendship would, although it's totally understandable to be upset by that.

The difference between if it was an agreed-upon romantic relationship and the platonic relationship it sounds like it was to me is that romantic relationships in our society are relationships that one treats somewhat formally - if any kind of romantic commitment is to happen, both parties are expected to agree to it explicitly, and if one party wants to end it, they're considered responsible for informing the other party (obviously, lots of relationships start out casually and morph without as much discussion, but it seems to be generally considered that for dating-levels of commitment, they still need to officially decide to be dating, and with break-ups it's pretty much required). Whereas friendships are typically conducted much less explicitly, and the "social rules" for becoming closer or withdrawing are generally that people show rather than tell what they'd like (I'd say it's usually socially acceptable to talk it out explicitly, at least with established friendships, but only expected or the norm in fairly rare situations). So my reaction to complaints about a friend vs. a romantic partner disengaging by dialling back the frequency/intensity of interaction and making fewer commitments with the person is different because that's what's generally expected in friendships and not within romantic relationships.

[Enail]

<mod>Oops, just realized this is getting pretty derailing, sorry! Datelessman and Inbloomer, do you have a preference for whether I split this off into a new thread or leave it here since some of it is tied in with the virginity talk?</mod>

[Datelessman]

<mod>Oops, just realized this is getting pretty derailing, sorry! Datelessman and Inbloomer, do you have a preference for whether I split this off into a new thread or leave it here since some of it is tied in with the virginity talk?</mod>

Technically Inbloomer is the original poster; at best I am the Original Reply-er. I don't have a problem with it, especially since I usually swing things back on topic whenever DNL inevitably does a letter, article, or podcast on the subject. It's not like we're talking about Pogs.

I'd argue the discussion shifting, at least for now, about the line between platonic and romantic relationships with women and whether a "Friend Zone" exists are fair game, especially from the OP.

Here's the thing. People like DNL have really pushed this line about the Friend Zone doesn't exist, you should feel grateful that this awesome woman wants to be your friend. In practice though, what's actually on offer is a friendship with a power imbalance. You feel you have to say yes to every invitation and drop everything and come running when asked, because you're the one who's lonely and trying to get out and do things with other people. But from her point of view you're her emergency plus one, if and when needed. That's not saying women are out to scam you, it's more that people have complicated lives and limited resources, and if you're not her top priority she may not be able to deliver the quality of friendship that you want and she might ideally want.

I do think it's a serious question though whether that's a good deal. It seems preferable to have someone to do things with than stay home alone, and yes there's a chance she could set you up with someone else, but does this imbalance ultimately breed resentment and lower self esteem? It's certainly the case that the boundaries can get a bit weird: the last woman I was in a "Schrodinger relationship" with got oddly snippy and jealous when I mentioned in the mildest way being attracted to anyone else, even though she definitely wasn't offering herself.

(I may reply to some of the expanded details from your subsequent posts, but since this reply was directly to me I quoted it.)

It goes without saying (which never stops me) that I disagree with DNL about a great many things, especially about older male virginity and some of the advice he gives them sometimes. However, on the topic of "the Friend Zone", or the lack thereof, I mostly agree with him.

I know you're feeling pain, confusion, and frustration over the turn of events with your friend that you reference here and go into detail with above. I am going to try to reply without putting any salt in wounds and try to use my words delicately. I don't know if I will succeed or not but I wanted to state my intent in advance.

A friendship, like any kind of relationship, CAN have a power imbalance. There can be one person who "wants" it more or puts in more of the effort to maintain it. I have found this to be true universally, not just for inter-gender relations. I have watched a lot of my friendships with fellow men who I knew since high school or earlier fade because one of us was moving away, or on, in life and it turned out I was the one who was rallying the soldiers more. The second I stopped, it faded. High school, and our shared hobbies of anime and tabletop role playing games (which I usually either created and/or moderated), coupled with physical proximity, were the glue which bound us. Once time and their own lives stretched that, the glue broke. If I stopped calling everyone to go collectively see a geek movie, none of them did. And soon some of my friends formed cliques within themselves without me, because I wasn't part of the clubbing/bar-hopping scene for most of college. These days on the rare occasions all of my core friends and I hang out, it is usually for a big event and for about 80-90% of them, I realize they are not really my friends anymore; they are the friends of the ghost of who I was in high school. The last one almost felt like a retirement party, with everyone sharing fond memories of the times we USED to have or the dude I USED to be. And these are fellow men, of which I have zero romantic interest. So the idea of this dynamic happening in friendships with women isn't impossible to me.

Where I draw the line with the "Friend Zone" talk is the belief that when this happens between men and women, that it is some sort of nefarious action or unconscious ovarian conspiracy. Now, I am not trying to deny that women are incapable of being manipulative, selfish, or even abusive. Nor am I trying to deny that a "Friend Zone" type of situation -- where a woman deliberately leads a hapless dude on for platonic favors with no intention of "rewarding" him for them -- has never played out anywhere. But in my opinion, a lot of the "Friend Zone" stuff comes up due to other factors which are not what many men believe they are. Just for the sake of some attempted clarity I will list them.

1). Too many people buy into the social story line that straight men and women cannot be friends independent of sexual desire. This is a social construct, but then again, so is the shame of male virginity and here we are. It seeps into pop culture, media, parental and official teaching, religion, etc. It's tough to crack or shy away from.

2). Many men go into friendships with women expecting an inevitable romantic reward. Now while the flip side may happen, from my experience the men usually the ones bleating the most about "the Friend Zone". But in many instances, due to how society teaches all of us to try to navigate romance via media, pop culture and so on, many men see friendship as the first stage of love, since we don't save princesses from dragons anymore. And it can be...if the women is interested. But that is not universal and a lot of men become disappointed when they feel their "friend-actions" are not eventually leading to romance or the woman in question doesn't suddenly "realize" how good they are. This also can be done not out of ignorance, but out of wanting to shift the pressure of making a move onto the woman. It's her role to realize what is going on and offer the "reward" for all that couch moving.

3). Many women, realizing this about men, can be hesitant to form friendships with them for the above reason. Also add that anywhere from 1:2 or 1:3 women are sexually abused by a man in their life, and it stands to reason why many women may keep some of the men at a distance or not be experts at interpreting feelings or displaying intent.

4). An imbalance of effort or interest even in the friendship level relationship can be misunderstood by some men as not due to the simple misunderstandings or miscues of life but as proof of a vast Amazonian master plan. Some of the same dudes who may shrug their shoulders and go,"Eh, typical" if their best bro moves away without a word and doesn't return that borrowed tape deck risk becoming foam at the mouth ranters if they experience the same from a woman who had the indignity to not offer some condolence lay. I have personally witnessed so many of the men in my life judge an entire gender over that "one woman who done them wrong," it makes my head spin, yet I have also known many women who have literally survived rape and/or incest not hate all men and lead "normal," productive lives where they date avidly.

5). Misunderstandings between men and women can often be themselves misunderstood or overreacted to, as some people project their own biases on them. I admit I used to do that more when I was younger and likely still do that a little now.

No one is "obligated" to be at someone's beck and call. If a friendship is that imbalanced, one party has the right to mention it and either try to negotiate a change, or choose another friend.

I don't say this as someone as some from a superior position, but perhaps as a reformed Friend-Zoner. In high school especially, I "befriended" more than one woman in the name of eventually "hoping" it would lead to romance and that being the motivating factor. When this didn't happen, I did get frustrated and even bitter at times; usually at myself (i.e. "why was I not the one they crushed on?"). But over time, I grew to value the friendships that arose to the point that I didn't care about how they started; I am an only child, but I value friendship heavily. I can exist and even thrive for a time alone, but I take genuine friendship very seriously. So as I got older and realized that some of those "friendships" would never "Digivolve" into Sexomon, I deliberately concentrated on not entering future friendships under such false pretenses and would appreciate the friendships that I did have. And I would let go of any lingering pines for them romantically. Life usually took care of that as many got married, engaged, or moved, but it became part of my transformation after college to not be envious or resentful of friends.

This was not easy. Just recently one of those lady friends, who is an ex of one of my best friends, started chatting with me out of the blue. She was feeling emotionally vulnerable and wanted someone to talk to. Unbeknownst to her, she's had an unintentionally significant role in my life. In college, during a house party where everyone but me was getting falling down drunk, I caught her when she was about to faceplant onto a porch, and accidentally touched the side of her breast. I apologized, and she laughed; I (in my youthful ignorance) apologized to my friend (who was dating her at the time) for it. He replied that he wasn't worried because "you wouldn't know what to do with a girl if one sat on your lap." That was the only time I ever got close to "second base" in my life. I suppose if I still believed in the "Friend Zone," I could conclude that she was leading me on; only talking to me when she needs some emotional support. But if I look back I realize it's because most of the rest of the circle turned on her after the break-up and cut off their friendships. Another one of my own "BFF's" is a woman who had the reputation around our social circle in high school and college of being "easy" or "a tramp." I've gotten to know her well over many years and she's none of those things; she's had a lot of tragedy and trauma in her life and despite a string of abusive relationships is far more positive about life in general than I am.

More than once I have heard or read one of the women I am friends with remark how I am their only straight male friend who didn't see friendship as a gambit to get into their pants. Do you know how awful it can make me feel if that was once, in the past, a motivating factor even if I'd long ago abandoned it and let the ship sail? How could I add stress to a friend by revealing past, secret desires or designs? And how could I possibly risk trying for anything more after a revelation like that? Usually when faced with such a choice, I choose friendship every time. After all, as their friend, I don't want to place an unwarranted emotional burden or shock on them. Also, as their friend, I usually know what types of men they want or are best for them and they ain't a non committal virgin in his late 30's.

I also have formed friendships, especially during and after college, which were 100% platonic, including with my best friend who I interact with daily. And in my experience some of the best friendships I have ever head, or at least the ones which have endured or been the most emotionally rewarding, were with women.

Friendships and romantic relationships can sometimes share traits. The emotional intimacy, the arranging of activities in advance, and so on. But in the end there is a divide. One can become the other, but their are different. But, most importantly, they are both vital, and many of the miscommunications which come up are part of the general humanity thing, not a specific men/women thing, IMO.

I am truly sorry your friend left you without some attempt to notify you more or offer some more closure. For me it is tough to lose any friend, man or woman. But even with the expanded view you gave, I don't see anything untoward here. Maybe you did contribute more to it and it did end abruptly, which has led you to some conclusions which feel justified. That doesn't make the emotional pain less real, though.

[inbloomer]

Thanks Enail. It was 18 months, so not all that short. The most intense period was near the beginning, but the intensity remained fairly high until the abrupt end. What happened then was that I'd invited her to come round, have a meal and watch a film with me - simply because I wanted to watch that film with someone. She was all keen and I spent all afternoon cleaning the flat and getting ready, then she flaked. Next time I saw her, I tentatively said I wasn't sure if she wanted to reschedule or if she didn't really want to do it - if so, no problem. She went into a whole lecture of "if I didn't want to do it I would have said so - OF COURSE let's reschedule!" A few days later she messaged me to say "actually I'm too busy to do anything with you for the foreseeable future. Bye." I sent a polite reply to that, then a few months later she messaged me to say "sorry I haven't been in touch but I moved city!" I couldn't face replying to that, and that was it. However much I respect her decision to move, I think it's fair to say that wasn't great handling from her. (I've mentioned in other posts that I get thrown when women enthusiastically say they want to do something but then their actions don't seem to back it up.)

P.S. Before we became close friends, she had previously gone out with someone I knew. He apparently said exactly the same thing about their break-up: he respected her decision, but the way she did it was very sudden and abrupt. And for them it had been a very long-term relationship.

[Enail]

That definitely wasn't great handling from her! She sounds like the kind of person that careens through close friendships and then suddenly drops them and moves on to the next one, which is just a shitty way to deal with people. I find that kind of person super-frustrating, too, to the point where I'll usually put some brakes on on my end if I get the sense they might be that kind of person or just not get much past friendly acquaintance with them them at all, so I definitely sympathize with your frustration and hurt. But especially if you know she treats people she's dating with the same intensity/sudden break-off pattern, and your friendship with her was platonic, I still don't follow why you're connecting it with not being the person that women are romantically enthused for or not being able to be a priority for people if they're not romantically interested in you - it sounds like a broad pattern with that person's social connections, not anything to do with an attraction problem.

[inbloomer]

To be fair she's not the greatest example of that specific point: she flaked a few times on things but I've no evidence that was anything to do with the boyfriend.

For a different example, I had a similar-ish "friendship" back when I was a teenager. In that case I did have more romantic desire and I misunderstood the early signals from her, though to be fair they were pretty easy to misunderstand - she used the "love" word a lot in communicating with me, and really did flirt, while her actual boyfriend for a long time she hid his existence, then for a long time she only referred to him as "a friend". It was only when this friend seemed to have rather a lot of influence over her movements - she flaked on some meet-ups and turned others down because he wasn't happy with them, then without notice she announced he wanted to meet me, to reassure himself I wasn't a threat to him - finally, under much probing, she used the word boyfriend. Once that had eventually come out, she really stuck the boot in, in terms of saying he generated lots of feelings that I never had and never could (even though he'd cheated on her).

Going back to the first woman, I did note what I knew about that break-up as a potential red flag, but her story of it was very different and that wasn't enough to slam the brakes on at that point. I would say it has been quite a common thread with the women I've known, that they have a pattern of going very close to someone for a period and then suddenly going cold and distant, leaving that person hurt and wondering what they did wrong. Of the two girls in our main friendship group in high school, I remember one telling me exactly that about the other. Obviously not all women are like that, but I wonder if there are certain common factors in the circles I've mixed in which mean I've encountered them at an abnormally high rate.

[Enail]

That wouldn't be surprising, it seems like people often land up being drawn to the same kinds of people, or at least to circles where the same kind of people hang out, over and over. It's probably a good idea to think about if/how that could be happening with you, but I wouldn't take it as a sign that you can't be someone people will want to prioritize so much as just a pattern of specific people that you fall in with.

I don't know if it would work for anyone else, but I've found with people like that that being pretty firm about not going along with the hurtle to intense closeness and sticking to a more ordinary, slow-paced and higher-boundaried style of friendship, actually seems to make them not behave that way with me and let us have normal, potentially long-lasting and pretty close friendships. But I haven't made friends with anyone like that for quite a long time, and I suspect it's easier to change the pattern with people who are younger and maybe still figuring out how they want to do friendship and/or romance in general rather than ones who are pretty set in their ways, so milage probably varies on that. I do think it'd likely help for you to be clear in your mind about where your lines between platonic and romantic are, speak up about what you want in either direction if you find it changing or if you feel like you're getting mixed signals, and not letting your relationships spend too much time in the ambiguous place in between, imo that ambiguity can really land up being an almost Skinner Box-like intermittent reinforcement that lends itself to that friendship pattern.

[inbloomer]

I'm speculating, but I wonder if what these circles have in common is growing up with a conservative, traditional idea of how relationships should work. Not necessarily strongly religious, but thinking that the valid options are friendship and deep, committed romance, with not really anything in between.

I had that view for a long time. I've softened on the idea of at least considering and being a bit more open to middling options, but that's after years of reading dating advice. My judgement about many of the women I've known is that the concept of friends with benefits would be way beyond their comfort zone, so would even a mild hook-up. Even the concept of a date that you mutually agree is a date before it happens and therefore accept it's an experiment that might not work (as opposed to seamlessly falling in love) I think would be pushing it. That's why I find the "state your intentions clearly at the outset" advice hard to enact - I don't think it's actually lack of courage on my part.

As an example of that mindset, those two girls who were in my friendship group in high school?
Both got married aged 20, and both marriages soon fell apart.

I wonder if that links to a tendency when your needs are not all being met to suddenly go very close to someone, while at the same time insisting "we're just friends, we're just friends, this isn't a thing"...

[Datelessman]

I think all three of us agree that how your friend ended your friendship was abrupt and unsatisfying.

I think were we disagree is that I genuinely don't believe there is anything drastic or distinct going on besides the fact that some friendships in general end awkwardly or unpleasantly based on circumstances and/or the lack of vision or foresight of at least one of the parties, but this becomes magnified when it happens between men & women because our society has so many messed up notions, rules, and norms about both gender and interpersonal relationships that it magnifies nearly everything that happens between men and women.

Let me clear about the "Friend Zone" thing. Like any social construct, it only exists if enough people believe it exists -- like Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, or Paulie Shore's career. And because enough people believe it exists, then perhaps functionally, it does. And I won't deny that there are some women who treat their relationships like college football spreadsheets where they keep dudes in ranks and whatnot...same as there are men who do that and have done that forever, and who never were looked down upon for it (i.e. smug jokes about his "little black book"). But I genuinely don't feel that it exists beyond that, and it merely is a rebranding of the awkward situations which can happen between friends and associates that has an extra label and level of focus added to it only because if and when women do it to men. I haven't ever seen women come up with "the Friend Zone" for men; instead they write books titled "He's Just Not That Into You." And many of the men who even gripe about the "Friend Zone," as I mentioned before, went into that "friendship" with different expectations. But, it may not always be because the man was conniving or anything, but merely because he absorbed that greater social narrative that "men and women can't be friends," and blocking out potent social messaging is very hard.

[Sponsored content]